Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 05-10-11 regular — reading text

Completed 05/ 03/ 2011 1: 18 PM Carole Jones Completed 05/ 03/ 2011 1: 20 PM City Manager Completed 05/ 04/ 20119: 14 AM City Council Pending DOC ID: 1256 Page 1  RESOLUTION ( ID # 1256) RESOLUTION 2011 -13 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA; SUPPORTING THE GREATER FORT WALTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND THE OKALOOSA COUNTY TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL EFFORTS TO PROMOTE SOUTHERN OKALOOSA COUNTY AS THE EMERALD COAST BRAND; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.  1 RESOLUTION 2011 -13 2 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF FORT WALTON BEACH, 4 FLORIDA; SUPPORTING THE GREATER FORT WALTON BEACH CHAMBER 5 OF COMMERCE AND THE OKALOOSA COUNTY TOURIST DEVELOPMENT 6 COUNCIL EFFORTS TO PROMOTE SOUTHERN OKALOOSA COUNTY AS THE 7 EMERALD COAST BRAND; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 8 9 WHEREAS, the beaches of the Gulf of Mexico are second to none in attracting visitors who come 10 to the area for recreational purposes; and 11 12 WHEREAS, the municipalities, Fort Walton Beach, Cinco Bayou, Mary Esther, Shalimar and 13 Destin, of the southern Okaloosa County are vital to provide services and utilities; and 14 15 WHEREAS, the Greater Fort Walton Beach Chamber of Commerce and the Okaloosa County 16 Tourist Development Council plan to promote the area of Southern Okaloosa County as the 17 Emerald Coast, with a common slogan and logo, also known as " Branding" the area. 18 19 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT 20 WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA THAT: 21 22 SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Fort Walton Beach supports the efforts of the Greater 23 Fort Walton Beach Chamber of Commerce and the Okaloosa County Tourist Development Council 24 to promote the area of Southern Okaloosa County as the Emerald Coast, with a common slogan and 25 a logo as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto. 26 27 SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Fort Walton Beach supports the concept of utilizing 28 the Emerald Coast slogan and logo on letterhead stationery, and will include such logo and slogan 29 as City signs are replaced. 30 31 SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its approval by the City Council 32 and signature by the Mayor. 33 34 Adopted: May 10, 2011 35 36 Mike Anderson, Mayor 37 38 Attest: Approved For Legal Sufficiency 39 40 41 42 Helen Spencer, City Clerk Hayward Dykes, City Attorney 1 Exhibit A 2 3 4 NORTHWEST To: Robert T. Mearns, City Manager From: Michael Beedie, Engineering & Utility Services Director Date: May 10, 2011 Subject: Ordinance 1851 - Amends a table in the LDC 1. REQUEST: 1. 1. The City received an application from the Dowd Law Firm, P. A., authorized agent on behalf of First Baptist Church of Fort Walton Beach, requesting an amendment to Section 16. 50 of the Land Development Code ( LDC), titled Signage Standards. The requested amendment is to remove the zoning designation CF ( Community Facilities) from Table 16 -7, Part 2 and place it in Table 16 -7, Part 1 which will provide for signs up to twenty -four (24) feet in height. 1. 2. The applicant paid the required $ 925. 00 application fee and deposit on April 27, 2011. 1. 3. The applicant desires to include the CF zoning district in Part 1 of Table 16 -7 because it is the applicant' s opinion that " The typical service provided by community facilities is more similar to those of commercial business in the number of people served is directly related to the size and location." 2. BACKGROUND: 2. 1. On March 24, 2011, the First Baptist Church of Fort Walton Beach, located at 21 First Street SE, requested a variance from the Board of Adjustment to waive a portion of the height restrictions on signage found in Table 16 -7, Part 2 of the LDC. 2. 2. During the hearing, the Board denied the request because there were no unique characteristics associated with the lot that would allow such a request. However, during the hearing it was suggested that all properties within this district might be better served if the requirements were changed. 2. 3. Community Facilities - The CF zoning district is a special purpose zoning district primarily, but not exclusively, intended for locations at which facilities are provided to serve public, quasi -public, and private purposes. Such purposes include governmental, religious, health care, social service, and special facilities in areas consistent with the Public Lands ( PL) future land use map designation in the City's Comprehensive Plan.  2. 4. Table 16 -7 is the table in the LDC that determines allowable design for signage within each district. The table is divided into two parts, Part 1 which includes the regulations for HC, C -2, M -1, M -2, MUCC -2 and MUW -24 and Part 2 which includes the regulations for zoning districts, MUMS, MUW -18, MUCC -1, CF, EF, OS, and YC. 2. 5. Table 16 -7 addresses the number of allowed signs, sign size, maximum height, maximum width, and installation requirements. 3. DISCUSSION: 3. 1. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan 3. 1. 1. Objective A.4 of the Comprehensive Plan states that " The city will continue to implement land development regulations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan." 3. 1. 2. Policy A.4.2 provides that the Land Development Code will include the following provisions: i) regulation of signage. 3. 1. 3. The request as provided will continue to provide regulation of signage as required in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. 2. Rationale for request 3. 2. 1. In the application provided, the applicant suggests that CF zoning districts are compatible with those districts found in Part 1 of Table 16 -7. 3. 2. 2. The application also suggests that by " following the street frontage in part one of the table, the larger community facilities, with more street frontage warrant larger signs." 3. 2. 3. Finally, the applicant suggests that by simply moving the zoning district into part one of the table, the street frontage requirement will maintain a proportionality between signage and building or property size. 3. 3. Impact of change analysis 3. 3. 1. Staff has completed an analysis of the potential impacts of the requested change on properties throughout the City. Staff analyzed the number of properties affected, any potential for nonconformities, and the impact on surrounding areas as well as any incompatibility that may result from the change. 3. 3. 1. 1. Total number of properties designated CF: 33 3. 3. 1. 2. Through the analysis, no potential nonconformities were identified primarily because the change will result in a less restrictive set of guidelines for this district. 3. 3. 1. 3. Through the analysis, it was determined that the impact on surrounding areas should be minimized by the frontage to height and size ratios found in Part 1 of Table 16 -7. 3. 3. 2. The requested change will result in the following changes in design  criteria: 3. 3. 2. 1. Whereas sandwich signs are allowed in Part 2 of the table, they are not allowed in Part 1. This will result in properties located within the CF district no longer being allowed to use sandwich signs. 3. 3. 2. 2. The maximum height requirements are substantially different between Part 1 and Part 2 of the table. The requirements are as follows: 3. 3. 2. 2. 1. Part 1 Maximum Height - Wall Sign / Sign Band - 3 feet high when a building fagade is located further than 300 feet from the street frontage line which it faces. 3. 3. 2. 2. 2. Part 1 Maximum Height - Monument Signs / Pole Signs - 24 feet for lots with frontage of 100 feet or more. Monument sign height ( maximum): 12 feet maximum height for lots with frontage of 76 -99 feet and 8 feet maximum for lots with frontage of 50 to 75 feet. 3. 3. 2. 2. 3. Part 2 Maximum Height - Wall Sign / Sign Band - 2- 2 feet high when building fagade is located further than 300 feet from the street frontage line which it faces. 3. 3. 2. 2. 4. Part 2 Maximum Height - Monument Signs / Pole Signs - Monument Height (maximum) 8 feet. 4. STAFF FINDINGS: 4. 1. The request to remove CF from Table 16 -7 Part 2 and include it in Table 16 -7 Part 1 is consistent with the City' s requirements for signage standards in the Comprehensive Plan. 4. 2. The change in table location will result in a change in design standards that will not create any foreseeable nonconformities. 4. 3. The request will affect 33 properties of several different sizes, shapes, and uses. Many of these properties are either a church, as is the applicant, or City -owned facilities. 4. 4. The request provides a logical method to ensure compatibility and proportionality of signage through the frontage to allowable height criteria found in Part 1 of the Table. 5. RECOMMENDATIONS: 5. 1. Based on the review of the application, and the analysis of the impacts of the change, Staff respectfully recommends approval of the request to amend the Land Development Code to remove CF ( Community Facilities) from Part 2 of Table  16 -7 and place it on Part